Do Violent Games Speak to a Lack of Creativity or Lack of Conviction?

Cover Story: Were this year's bloodiest announcements inspired by a failure to innovate?

S

everal developers may be aiming to add meaning and context to the violence the dominates gaming's most popular titles, but fans of senseless virtual slaughter needn't worry: This year's E3 offers plenty of opportunities for savage, imaginary brutality. In fact, Monday's press conferences pounded the concept of violence into our eyes, ears, and minds with relentless persistence.

Why were this year's E3 press briefings -- Microsoft, Sony, Electronic Arts, and Ubisoft -- so laser-focused on visual savagery? Is the idea of gaming as a virtual charnel house the best way these developers and publishers know to cover their failure to come up with more nuanced approaches to game design? Or do the bloody shootings, stabbings, and dismemberments speak instead to publishers' lack of confidence in gamers' willingness to support a game that doesn't pander to their most vicious instincts?